capturing from VCR and encoding in 2020.

[videovhsdvdhelp1]

I'm new here I did post in an old topic but I thought to myself lets add 2020 to the title and post again. Sorry if this is not allowed I'm a newbie

I need help in getting the best quality when capturing VHS tapes from my VCR to PC for burning onto disc even though DVD is somewhat a dead format I just want something that is a hard copy just in case data would get deleted from my back up hard drive or a virus or something for safe keeping large amount GB hard drives are expensive, how many good quality movies fit on 1 before it runs at of space? I use mine as a stop gap kind of thing, this suits me best.

My set up is Windows 10 PC, I capture using Matrox mx02 mini I think it's the best option as better quality capture cards don't exist anymore. I have all the cheapo USB 2.0 ones that are on ebay easy cap, dazzle. I also have a DV converter Canopus ADVC 110 the capture quality is just not good enough.

I use Panasonic NV-HV121 VCR for capture TBC I use Panasonic DVD recorder as pass through I just can't afford a full frame TBC, they are hard to find as it is.

I'm capturing using the given Matrox A/V tools in the uncompressed AVI Matrox codec I have an external hard drive, I rip 1 film at a time then I export project the newly created project to movie studio for editing and colour correction then encoding The final result is never that good even if I encode at full quality, I don't understand why? I am close to pulling my hair out. I would be happy to buy new software I hate downloading free stuff because of virus issues, a lot of free software has viruses, sourceforge is a hot bed for viruses I got a virus from source before when downloading Audacity 3rd pary Lame.mp3 encoder never downloading from source forge again on my new PC.

I use the default mainconcept encoder I think this is the problem I don't think its good enough, can any one recommend a better paid encoder or another software that will do the job?. I have heard about ffmeg for de-interlacing the site looked safe enough so I wanted to download it I don't know which file to download as the actual programme. I download a file from the download section but it would not run, if someone could help me then that would be great.

I have read that you should not de-interlace footage meant for DVD as this takes away a frame and 50% detail, most softwares have blend option interpolate fields at best. DVD authoring apps have an option called 'Reduce interlace flicker' this seems to work best with footage left interlaced. de-interlaced main concept mpeg2 footage is blocky if you know what I mean?

Please guide me to the right path u guys are my only hope I have tried everything after this I will give up

[DB83]

I doubt if that Matrox codec is really uncompressed and even if it is then it is a waste of resources.


But for the sake of clarity and comprehension as to what is going on I would suggest you upload a short 20 second sample captured from this device.


Let us address that before we address the other issues. Even if all have been covered ad-nauseum in other threads.

[johnmeyer]

I agree that a sample is needed. You used the word "movie" at one point in your post and if the material originated on film (e.g., a theatrical movie that was broadcast and then recorded on VHS tape), you may need to do some work on it before encoding. Since you are in the UK, your PAL format makes that less likely, but we'd still need to look at a sample.

Also, how many minutes of material are you trying to fit onto a DVD; what encoder are you using; and what bitrate are you using? With a cheap, single-pass MPEG-2 encoder, the picture quality will break down pretty badly once you go below 6,000,000 bits per seconds (bps). You can go lower than that if you use two-pass encoding and if you use a professional MPEG-2 encoder, but even with those things, 4,000,000 bps is about as low as you can go. Ideally you want to use something near the maximum allowed by the MPEG-2 spec which, depending on how the audio is encoded, and on whether you are including other things (like subtitles) is somewhere a little above 8,000,000 bps.

[videovhsdvdhelp1]

I doubt if that Matrox codec is really uncompressed and even if it is then it is a waste of resources.


But for the sake of clarity and comprehension as to what is going on I would suggest you upload a short 20 second sample captured from this device.


Let us address that before we address the other issues. Even if all have been covered ad-nauseum in other threads.

It says uncompressed shows .avi uncompressed in the properties the file size is huge which makes me think it is.
I will see if I can post a clip.
I have the matrox avi codec and main concept codec for DVD rendering. Do I have any better paid options available?

[videovhsdvdhelp1]

I agree that a sample is needed. You used the word "movie" at one point in your post and if the material originated on film (e.g., a theatrical movie that was broadcast and then recorded on VHS tape), you may need to do some work on it before encoding. Since you are in the UK, your PAL format makes that less likely, but we'd still need to look at a sample.

[I'll try and upload a clip soon] Even if its random recorded stuff from TV the final result is bad my thinking is its the main concept codec the martox is fine the raw capture is good, it's a bit hard to tell as it captures interlaced. I think you can de-interlace when playing back by clicking play 1 field or some option like that in the matrox AV tools software that is matrox provided with the capture card free as recording and playback software.

QUOTE=johnmeyer;2591650]
Also, how many minutes of material are you trying to fit onto a DVD; what encoder are you using; and what bitrate are you using? With a cheap, single-pass MPEG-2 encoder, the picture quality will break down pretty badly once you go below 6,000,000 bits per seconds (bps). You can go lower than that if you use two-pass encoding and if you use a professional MPEG-2 encoder, but even with those things, 4,000,000 bps is about as low as you can go. Ideally you want to use something near the maximum allowed by the MPEG-2 spec which, depending on how the audio is encoded, and on whether you are including other things (like subtitles) is somewhere a little above 8,000,000 bps.[/QUOTE]

Same as above main concept mpeg2 that comes with the movie studio software I encode at around 6,000 VB as constent will go over the 8.5GB disc limit so between 3,000 -6,000 single pass that is what ur standard is any higher 8 onwards the DVD player will freeze or have a hard time reading the disc.

I dont de-interlace I just use the reduce interlace ficker option. D I just takes out a frame and a lot of the details with it causing issues if the content has a fast scene like running or quick movement. DI causes noise on the picture that is what 'I've seen so far with movie studio I was thinking of up grading to vegas but I got a reply from dell sam on another old thread on here and he said no vegas will not help you in getting good quality. I'm still stuck between a rock and a hard place. Who knew capturing VHS would be so difficult I thought it would be a walk in the park hook up the capture card with vcr and panasonic pass through dvd recorder click record on the capture software and burn to disc. Not that easy joining u guys is like putting my hands up and saying I've lost the battle I can't do this on my own I need your help guys. Please help me out think of me as a tiny baby the video world capture world. Thanks

[davexnet]

Yes I can see that. Just about everything you're assuming is wrong. Best to start with a sample of a straight capture
and upload it here.

[johnmeyer]

I dont de-interlace I just use the reduce interlace ficker option.

I have used Vegas Pro for over twenty years and know it very well. I think Movie Studio uses the same MainConcep MPEG-2 encoder, but exposes fewer controls (the purchased MainConcept encoder, which I own, has about 5x the number of controls available).

I would recommend to NOT check the "reduce interlace flicker" option. That generally produces worse results. It is primarily for "line twitter," the artifact sometimes seen when encoding text with serifs (horizontal lines at the top/bottom of characters) and you get "flicker" (it's actually the wrong term for what is happening) as the encoder has a hard time figuring out which scan line to put the serif on, and the text will oscillate up/down if the software wants to put it between the scan line. Unless you have that particular artifact, turning "reduce interlace flicker" on will reduce the sharpness of your video, so it should be left off.

You also want to make sure you use the Best option for the MPEG-2 encoding. Back around 2005, we had lots of discussion about this in the Sonic Foundry Vegas forum (ah, the good old days). It turns out that "Good" is just fine if you are encoding to the same exact resolution as your original video, but if you are re-sizing as well as encoding, which is the case when using 1920x1080 HD video (or higher res) to produce a 720x480 DVD, then you want to specify Best because it uses algorithms which are better tuned for resizing.

An even more important point when encoding MPEG-2 from HD material is a major bug I discovered a decade ago, but which MainConcept never fixed, and Sony (they owned it then) only "fixed" by adding a BandAid which reduces the chance of experiencing the bug, but doesn't eliminate it.

The bug is this: you MUST match the field order in the Mainconcept MPEG-2 encoder to the field order of your main video. Before HD, most SD video in North America was lower field first, and this was the default for the MainConcept "DVD Architect" MPEG-2 template (the one you should use when encoding for a DVD). However, HD video is upper field first. This should not make one bit of difference because all the MainConcept engineers had to do was drop the first field, but the encoder clearly wasn't doing this. A bunch of us in that forum spent weeks and weeks trying to figure out why we were getting DVD renders that didn't look stunningly sharp. We created all sorts of tortured workflows in order to feed Vegas projects into external MPEG-2 encoders. This produced great results, but man, was it a lot of work.

During all the tests that about five of us did, I stumbled into the solution: simply make sure that the field order in the MPEG-2 template matches the source. This produces results equivalent to the tortured workflow.

I reported the bug to Sony. Unfortunately, since they license the code from MainConcept, a company that was moribund, they took a shortcut and simply changed the default in the MPEG-2 "DVD Architect" template to Upper field first, which matches HD content which by that time represented the vast majority of projects being produced.

So, just make sure that this matches. If it doesn't or if you are using Good instead of Best, either of those things will result in a substandard result.

[DB83]

I found the specs for this device. It states there are two capture modes - Mpeg2 I-Frame only (not really uncompressed since Mpeg2 is a lossly format even at high bitrates and 'uncompressed'.


The former will require access to the Matrox codec (I recall some years ago(10+) when I acquired some video for promotional purposes. It was a PITA to outsource a codec to convert to a more accessable form)


The latter should, if indeed it is what is says on the tin, not require a codec. You will be looking at up to 2 gb per minute so, yes, the files are large but we do not need much which is why only 10/20 secs were requested.


And neither can simply capture and burn to give you a dvd. Many programs exist to achieve that. And all will re-encode your capture in to a more manageable size. Which, itself defeats the purpose in capturing 'uncompressed' in the first place. But it seems using this device you only have two options. Typically we would suggest other avenues. And I am surprised by your comment about the ADVC. You are in PAL land just like me. And DV should give perfectably acceptable results and only 13 gb per hour.

[johnmeyer]

Since this is PAL, I think I can make my usual pitch for using DV without getting too many people upset. You do still have to deal with DV compression artifacts, but compared to MPEG-2 I think they are about the same. The PAL color space is much superior to the NTSC DV variant, so that is not a big deal in this case.

The big advantage to capturing with DV is that in my experience -- both personal, and helping others for 20+ years -- is that it is pretty much bulletproof. You will not drop frames, you will not have proc amp issues (I've seen a lot of really bad video levels from other capture chains) and the video will play amazing smoothly in any NLE.

[videovhsdvdhelp1]

[QUOTE=johnmeyer;2591705]
I have used Vegas Pro for over twenty years and know it very well. I think Movie Studio uses the same MainConcep MPEG-2 encoder, but exposes fewer controls (the purchased MainConcept encoder, which I own, has about 5x the number of controls available).
[\QUOTE]

I should upgrade to vegas from movie studio then? I did not even know u could buy main concept I always thought it was free, the free version has a watermark on it when encoding.
If that is going to improve things then I will buy main concept encoder and the latest version of sony vegas I just want to make sure that I will get quality after that and money will not be wasted.

I would recommend to NOT check the "reduce interlace flicker" option. That generally produces worse results. It is primarily for "line twitter," the artifact sometimes seen when encoding text with serifs (horizontal lines at the top/bottom of characters) and you get "flicker" (it's actually the wrong term for what is happening) as the encoder has a hard time figuring out which scan line to put the serif on, and the text will oscillate up/down if the software wants to put it between the scan line. Unless you have that particular artifact, turning "reduce interlace flicker" on will reduce the sharpness of your video, so it should be left off.

So leave the content interlaced when encoding the content only use that option when burning to DVD or not use it at all?
I was thinking that would be a better option than de-interlacing, some times de-interlacing can cause picture noise and so do some encoders even the main concept encoder does even if you set it to 9,800 everything to best the rendered results have a silver line or going through them.

[QUOTE=johnmeyer;2591705]
You also want to make sure you use the Best option for the MPEG-2 encoding. Back around 2005, we had lots of discussion about this in the Sonic Foundry Vegas forum (ah, the good old days). It turns out that "Good" is just fine if you are encoding to the same exact resolution as your original video, but if you are re-sizing as well as encoding, which is the case when using 1920x1080 HD video (or higher res) to produce a 720x480 DVD, then you want to specify Best because it uses algorithms which are better tuned for resizing.[\QUOTE]

same as captured source for DVD rendering 720×575 standard pal res and 25 frame rate but I do crop out tracking noise if any.

An even more important point when encoding MPEG-2 from HD material is a major bug I discovered a decade ago, but which MainConcept never fixed, and Sony (they owned it then) only "fixed" by adding a BandAid which reduces the chance of experiencing the bug, but doesn't eliminate it.

The bug is this: you MUST match the field order in the Mainconcept MPEG-2 encoder to the field order of your main video. Before HD, most SD video in North America was lower field first, and this was the default for the MainConcept "DVD Architect" MPEG-2 template (the one you should use when encoding for a DVD). However, HD video is upper field first. This should not make one bit of difference because all the MainConcept engineers had to do was drop the first field, but the encoder clearly wasn't doing this. A bunch of us in that forum spent weeks and weeks trying to figure out why we were getting DVD renders that didn't look stunningly sharp. We created all sorts of tortured workflows in order to feed Vegas projects into external MPEG-2 encoders. This produced great results, but man, was it a lot of work.

Yes this seems to be the issue I keep messing around with lower filed, first, upper filed. de-interlace none, blend, interpolate fields I don't know what to set it to? The template I use is the PAL template I think I have tested the DVD architect template too results are no better. I don't know what filed order matrox captures in I go to content properties but I do not see field order or maybe I'm wrong on that.

During all the tests that about five of us did, I stumbled into the solution: simply make sure that the field order in the MPEG-2 template matches the source. This produces results equivalent to the tortured workflow.

I reported the bug to Sony. Unfortunately, since they license the code from MainConcept, a company that was moribund, they took a shortcut and simply changed the default in the MPEG-2 "DVD Architect" template to Upper field first, which matches HD content which by that time represented the vast majority of projects being produced.

So, just make sure that this matches. If it doesn't or if you are using Good instead of Best, either of those things will result in a substandard result.

Its upper filed first I thought it was first maybe because my content is captured upper field first. I have heard about an encoder called pro cinema craft coder I don't think its availble anymore but from what I've heard and read Hollywood studios used it for DVD production.

[videovhsdvdhelp1]

I found the specs for this device. It states there are two capture modes - Mpeg2 I-Frame only (not really uncompressed since Mpeg2 is a lossly format even at high bitrates and 'uncompressed'.

They have 2 capture options available 1 is Matrox .avi (uncompressed) and matrox iframe mpeg 2 (which I do not use) u can use which ever one u want if u just want a straight forward rip no editing or colour grading then u just capture in mpeg2 and burn to disc but if you plan on doing work on the footage then use matrox .avi, what makes me think it is uncompressed is its huge file size a 1 min clip raw would capture at say 3GB with compressed .avi it will do 3GB for 2 hrs as I have also tested a DV capture device canopus advc110 it can only capture in compressed .avi and the file size is tiny.

The former will require access to the Matrox codec (I recall some years ago(10+) when I acquired some video for promotional purposes. It was a PITA to outsource a codec to convert to a more accessable form)


The latter should, if indeed it is what is says on the tin, not require a codec. You will be looking at up to 2 gb per minute so, yes, the files are large but we do not need much which is why only 10/20 secs were requested.

I'll upload a video when I'm on my PC using smart phone to reply back, u guys are taking ur time to help out this guy who has no clue
I thank u all please guide me in getting good results I'm not looking for 1080 HD just standard 720 SD.

And neither can simply capture and burn to give you a dvd. Many programs exist to achieve that. And all will re-encode your capture in to a more manageable size. Which, itself defeats the purpose in capturing 'uncompressed' in the first place. But it seems using this device you only have two options. Typically we would suggest other avenues. And I am surprised by your comment about the ADVC. You are in PAL land just like me. And DV should give perfectably acceptable results and only 13 gb per hour.

But I need to work on the footage edit colour correct so I would need to re-render once anyway and if I was to re-render compressed .avi that would lose more quality, because uncompressed .avi is a larger file size I'm thinking it will have less of an effect on the final mpeg2 even at best encoding. 9,800 but u cant go over the DVD size limit 8.5GB dual layer disc. I would have to re-encode at VB 3,00 - 6,500 bitrate to fit things in as it were.

Are u joking the canopus ADVC 110 is a mess the final result from that makes the content look animated cartoons, its that bad. The look is 10x worse than the original tape.

[videovhsdvdhelp1]

Since this is PAL, I think I can make my usual pitch for using DV without getting too many people upset. You do still have to deal with DV compression artifacts, but compared to MPEG-2 I think they are about the same. The PAL color space is much superior to the NTSC DV variant, so that is not a big deal in this case.

The compression is very heavy on DV it is not made for VHS capture, it is easy to edit that is the only advantage but u lose so much detail when capturing it makes it not worth going down that road if capturing with the intent of making a DVD. If it was from a short online clip then maybe.

The big advantage to capturing with DV is that in my experience -- both personal, and helping others for 20+ years -- is that it is pretty much bulletproof. You will not drop frames, you will not have proc amp issues (I've seen a lot of really bad video levels from other capture chains) and the video will play amazing smoothly in any NLE.

But I'm sure you will lose detail along the way lets say I capture in DV compressed.avi then I need to edit and render .mpeg2 . This will be a huge loss in quality 2 formats both compressed. This I have done already and the quality is no good the content looks cartoonish when its not

What do you and the other guys use or used in the past for VHS capture?

[DB83]

Ok. But I still fail to understand your comment about the Canopus. And also note that johnmeyer also was happy to suggest it.


And I write from my own experience. Not a 110 but it's big bro 300. But both do the same >> take SD analogue and 'convert' to sigital over a firewire connection. If you transferred that digital stream to your PC you will get an avi at 13 gb per hour. So not exactly 'tiny' as you point out. So either you did some transcoding on the way to the PC and not transferred as DV or your ADVC is faulty.


I think that johnmeyer also covered this but I will still elaborate. True that you want to edit any capture footage without a re-encode. But once you start to capture anything of reasonable length as uncompressed that 'huge' file becomes 'gigantic' and your system might simply not be up to the task to read/write/edit. You drop frames and your precious edit becomes worthless.


I do not use Vegas (I flirted with it possibly 10+ years ago) but, again I stand to be corrected, I would not buy the Pro version to access the full mainconcept encoder since I do not think it is there.

[DB83]

And to answer your latest Q.


My current workflow for VHS is VCR (no dvd passthrough) >> ADVC 300 analogue passthrough >> Hauppauge USB-Live2 >> capture as mpeg2 with the Hauppauge s/w or lossless (lagarith) using virtualdub. When I was doing this semi-regularily (did not won the USB-Live then) I would still use the ADVC but then capture DV or even transcode to mpeg2 at highest available bitrates.

[johnmeyer]

I was going to answer again, but it appears that none of my comments have been understood. I wish I could help more, but I cannot. Best of luck with your project.

[videovhsdvdhelp1]

Ok. But I still fail to understand your comment about the Canopus. And also note that johnmeyer also was happy to suggest it.

The picture is not good I tested it with 2 different VCRS. S Video capture, still I get picture noise blocky footage due to default dv compression if de-interlaced it would look like a mess.

I can't speak for the ADVC 300 I only have advc55 I and110 I think matrox mx-02 does the job well. Avermedia pcie capture card is also good but the picture has jerks during playback of the captured footage most probably a software glitch. The quality is better than canopus

And I write from my own experience. Not a 110 but it's big bro 300. But both do the same >> take SD analogue and 'convert' to sigital over a firewire connection. If you transferred that digital stream to your PC you will get an avi at 13 gb per hour. So not exactly 'tiny' as you point out. So either you did some transcoding on the way to the PC and not transferred as DV or your ADVC is faulty.

Raw canopus .avi files are useless to most of us that want to edit colour grade.

I capture everything on standalone usb 3.0 hard drive 1 tape at a time so large files might not be much of an issue other than they take ages to load up on movie studio for editing.
as DV outputs/records compressed re-compressing that to mpeg2 at VB or even full bitrare it would look 2x worse than VHS re-encoding dv .avi file to mpeg2 will cause it to skip frames.

I think that johnmeyer also covered this but I will still elaborate. True that you want to edit any capture footage without a re-encode. But once you start to capture anything of reasonable length as uncompressed that 'huge' file becomes 'gigantic' and your system might simply not be up to the task to read/write/edit. You drop frames and your precious edit becomes worthless.

What you do is u record in avi uncompressed raw. then u edit colour grade then you safe final again in .avi uncompressed huge size losing no quality then you import it to dvd authoring programe then you allow it to compress that file once by clicking 'Fit project to disc' this option in return encodes mpeg2 VB 1 lot of quality lose, most people don't de-interlace DVD footage because u lose a frame so its best if u let the TV do the de-interlacing, having said that the newer HD TVS do not deinterlace well at all.

I do not use Vegas (I flirted with it possibly 10+ years ago) but, again I stand to be corrected, I would not buy the Pro version to access the full mainconcept encoder since I do not think it is there.

I want to buy a good software or stand alone encoder what choices do I have and cost in UK money?

[videovhsdvdhelp1]

And to answer your latest Q.


My current workflow for VHS is VCR (no dvd passthrough) >> ADVC 300 analogue passthrough >> Hauppauge USB-Live2 >> capture as mpeg2 with the Hauppauge s/w or lossless (lagarith) using virtualdub. When I was doing this semi-regularily (did not won the USB-Live then) I would still use the ADVC but then capture DV or even transcode to mpeg2 at highest available bitrates.

Have I understood correctly u are capturing in mpeg2? That means u will not get a high bitrate most of these cheap hauppage devices do not go beyond 6mbps. I had the hauppage PVR 1212 it can capture .avi compressed .mpeg2 .mp4 but they give u some outdated software called Media extreme I think it use to freeze up on my Windows 7.

I've read ADVC 300 black colour has a bulit in TBC I could be wrong. I am not a tech person but from what I understand DV was not made for vhs capture it was for that 30 mins when ur kid was dancing for the first time on his birthday you would capture that using ur camera, home footage shot on a normal camera not for capturing already recorded footage like tv shows or old films not released on DVD which would be 35 yrs old ur dv camera footage would be know, now all cameras take SD card u put the SD card into PC slot n download footage.

[DB83]

Well I can not add more. You do appear rather opinionated even if such opinion is mis-guided.


I have no time, or patience, to even attempt to correct you. And you wonder why johnmeyer, who knows more about these things than I do, also withdrew from the topic.


Right back you were asked for a sample. Even one of your 'crappy' DV.avi could have helped you. But unless you want to get off your soap-box then save yourself the time and trouble.


PS. A perfectly good, as good as mainconcept, mpeg2 encoder can cost you zilch. Just do a little research here.

[johnmeyer]

And you wonder why johnmeyer, who knows more about these things than I do, also withdrew from the topic.

Gosh, I most certainly do not know more than you, but thanks for saying so. However, I think I do know more than the OP.

I am increasingly puzzled as to why he even started the topic or why he is asking questions. He seems to have his workflow sorted out to his own satisfaction without any help from anyone here.

And that, of course, is all that matters.

[dvd3500]

I have used an AVDC 300 for years as back then there were few options on my set up of the time that made for perfect audio/video synch. I also felt that being able to adjust the picture in real-time was a time saver as running any filters on the video took a long time and energy.

I generally would start up the video, open the AVDC control app and play with the sliders until I was happy.

I think captured, edited and exported to MPEG2 using the highest settings possible in Ulead MediaStudio Pro (yes... old I know..) and authored to DVD.

I have not done this since 2007 but at the time, the results were achieved in approximately a factor of 1.5 -2X real time i.e. for a 2 hour movie it took me 3 to 4 hours.
This time also meant me shifting files across external hard drives at USB 2.X speeds (!) as I needed to free up space for the large files.

The DV standard is (and was back then) so well documented it just cut a lot of variables out. It was also very conducive to editing.

For standard definition and for TVs back then the quality was more than sufficient.

Yes this is all very old and I hope to revisit and update my workflow some day but the AVDC 300 is not a bad set of kit and in my opinion it saves time.

Yes you could probably achieve "better" results but when you are jumping out of a plane at 10 thousand feet I don't think the color of the parachute should matter that much...

One last point: I still have all my VHS, the ADVC300 and all the original DV AVI captures. This isn't virginity in that when you encode it once it is over... you can do it over and over and over...

[DB83]

And you wonder why johnmeyer, who knows more about these things than I do, also withdrew from the topic.

Gosh, I most certainly do not know more than you, but thanks for saying so. However, I think I do know more than the OP.

I am increasingly puzzled as to why he even started the topic or why he is asking questions. He seems to have his workflow sorted out to his own satisfaction without any help from anyone here.

And that, of course, is all that matters.

Well he came here since it seems his wonderful workflow is not producing the results he expected.


But if he really does want help then he must cooperate. Go to a doctor and he could not give a proper diagnosis without access to the full facts. So in this case samples are required.


Ideally:


1. A short 'RAW' (wrong word I know but...) sample capture avi
2. That same sample but now edited/processed in to the OPs preferred output format which seems at present to be mpeg2 dvd-video.
3. If he still has the ADVC, a similar 'RAW' sample ideally of the self-same footage.
4. Likewise edited/processed to mpeg2


If he does this then I will do the same. We can then 'compare notes' and maybe move progress.

[videovhsdvdhelp1]

I was going to answer again, but it appears that none of my comments have been understood. I wish I could help more, but I cannot. Best of luck with your project.

I'm back please do I'm willing to download ffmpeg it seems secure I does not download the programme just files. Where do I have to go to download the working programme?

If I can get it working I will use that to capture and de-interlace, the only reason I'm using vegas is to colour grade. if ffmpeg has a free colour grading tool I'm ready to give it ago.
sourgeforge is not secure I can't risk the security of my PC

[videovhsdvdhelp1]

I have used an AVDC 300 for years as back then there were few options on my set up of the time that made for perfect audio/video synch. I also felt that being able to adjust the picture in real-time was a time saver as running any filters on the video took a long time and energy.

I don't have the ADVC300 I'm using the 110 the easy way of doing it is capture in moviestudios dv capture then import to moviestudio for editing and colour grading, thats how I've always done results vary from tape to tape I suspect it's the encoder that is the problem with the newer movie studio the studio 12 had a better encoder but it would crash on Windows 7 not even tried it on Windows 10 64 bits.

[QUOTE=dvd3500;2591979]
I generally would start up the video, open the AVDC control app and play with the sliders until I was happy.

I think captured, edited and exported to MPEG2 using the highest settings possible in Ulead MediaStudio Pro (yes... old I know..) and authored to DVD.
[\QUOTE]

Ulead studio basic use to come free with the cheap easy crap usb capture cards from china I've used it on windows vista in 2007 I think never captured a full vhs on it, not many options with the basic one I can't speak for pro.

I have not done this since 2007 but at the time, the results were achieved in approximately a factor of 1.5 -2X real time i.e. for a 2 hour movie it took me 3 to 4 hours.
This time also meant me shifting files across external hard drives at USB 2.X speeds (!) as I needed to free up space for the large files.

The DV standard is (and was back then) so well documented it just cut a lot of variables out. It was also very conducive to editing.

For standard definition and for TVs back then the quality was more than sufficient.

Yes this is all very old and I hope to revisit and update my workflow some day but the AVDC 300 is not a bad set of kit and in my opinion it saves time.

Yes you could probably achieve "better" results but when you are jumping out of a plane at 10 thousand feet I don't think the color of the parachute should matter that much...

One last point: I still have all my VHS, the ADVC300 and all the original DV AVI captures. This isn't virginity in that when you encode it once it is over... you can do it over and over and over...

I want the best results I can get in 2020 I dont want the picture to be blocky ADVC DV capture always is because its not raw .avi when u re-encode it to mpeg2 it will look half its best some people de-interlace some don't.
I don't think DV captures all the colours in full the colours never look like the tape recording much lighter, as it captures interlaced its hard to make out much, you have to test de-interlace.

I don't think you should keep re-encoding a re-encoded file I sure it will suffer frame drops and colour issues and each time you re-encode it file will be small in its size each time.

[videovhsdvdhelp1]

And you wonder why johnmeyer, who knows more about these things than I do, also withdrew from the topic.

Gosh, I most certainly do not know more than you, but thanks for saying so. However, I think I do know more than the OP.

I am increasingly puzzled as to why he even started the topic or why he is asking questions. He seems to have his workflow sorted out to his own satisfaction without any help from anyone here.

And that, of course, is all that matters.

Well he came here since it seems his wonderful workflow is not producing the results he expected.


But if he really does want help then he must cooperate. Go to a doctor and he could not give a proper diagnosis without access to the full facts. So in this case samples are required.


Ideally:


1. A short 'RAW' (wrong word I know but...) sample capture avi
2. That same sample but now edited/processed in to the OPs preferred output format which seems at present to be mpeg2 dvd-video.
3. If he still has the ADVC, a similar 'RAW' sample ideally of the self-same footage.
4. Likewise edited/processed to mpeg2


If he does this then I will do the same. We can then 'compare notes' and maybe move progress.

Will do for sure once I start up kit.
So 1 yiu want a capture from my advc 110 as it is.avi

2. you want 1 in avi encoded to mpeg2 using main concept its all I have right now. Should I de-interlace in movie studio or leave it as it is 1 min should be ok right?

I was trying to download ffmpeg seems secure but I don't know what link to follow to get a working programme downloaded. If that can capture from my matrox mx02 mini and has a colour grade plug in im willing to use that, it seems to offer a lot of plug-ins even a subtitle plug-in I'm just praying it has no virus or spyware attached to it, quite often free softwares do I'm not saying this one does and it seems to be updated too. Seems perfect for my needs.

[DB83]

If your source is interlaced, you keep it as interlaced.

[jagabo]

I was trying to download ffmpeg seems secure but I don't know what link to follow to get a working programme downloaded.

Assuming you're using 64 bit Windows get the latest 64 bit static release build for Windows. This site has links:

https://www.videohelp.com/download/ffmpeg-4.3.1-win64-static.zip
https://www.videohelp.com/software/ffmpeg

[dellsam34]

The OP is taking on three problems in one go. He should figure out how to get a lossless capture file to the hard drive first which it should not look blocky at all as he described. Second, figure out how to restore it and which software is the best. Third, find a good encoder for the final format. By the way you should always keep the lossless files, you will come back to them when something goes wrong, So you need some serious storage, however using HuffYUV can slash your storage requirement in half.

[johnmeyer]

I know of absolutely no reason to ever capture uncompresed when a good lossless codec will give you the same result and will avoid problems with disk subsystems not being able to keep up with the massive data flow required for uncompressed video.

[dellsam34]

I can give you my 4 main reasons why I capture lossless first:

1- The analog video frame is not perfect, So I will have to trim off the unnecessary edges, I run it thru Vdub and examine the frame, My captures are 720x486 so I have 6 lines to play with vertically and 16 pixels to play with horizontally, I scroll thru the timeline and make sure my crop is consistent thru-out the entire video, once I'm satisfied with my new almost clean frame 704x480 (D1 Standard as defined by the founding fathers of capturing), I save as HuffYUV and this will be my master file, the captured file is then deleted.

2- I don't de-interlace all captures so I like to have the option to encode from either an interlaced file (the master copy) or from a de-interlaced file.

3- I work in 4:2:2 all the way to the encoded final file, lossy formats are 4:2:0 or 4:1:1.

4- If I want to do some restoration and/or color correction, it is just dumb to do it from a lossy format

Now you know 4 reasons.

[Cornucopia]

@dellsam34, johnmeyer was questioning UNCOMPRESSED vs lossless, not lossy vs lossless.

I can only think of 3+ reasons (assuming subsystem CAN support throughput):

1. Quicker decoding/encoding - no transformations at all, just data read & load into memory, or write from memory. This would prrobably have to assume at least SSD, though.

2. Universality - no need to install 3rd party codecs of any flavor or platform. This (used to) include transfer between PC & Mac.

3. Alternately, with some variants, support for alpha channel and other high-end features (color system, bitdepth, dyn range), or odd data orderings.

4. (Based on #1 & 2) Ability to programmatically read & write data fairly easily from/to non-video-centric applications.


Scott